OK, so WHO is lying?
- Thread starter coinmaster32
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 196
- Views 27K
I'm getting in on this one late in the game so if someone has made this point, sorry, I didn't have time to go through the whole thread. The point that I always point out in these situations is really simple. The broadcaster sees the retransmission fees as a cash cow and feels that the distributor, in this case Dish, will pay or risk losing subscribers. What these broadcasters haven't learned yet is that the distributor doesn't lose enough business to warrant the fees asked for by the broadcaster. The channel(s) go away and the broadcaster sits back waiting for Dish to come back and say OK we need you. Eventually the broadcaster realizes that his channel(s) missing from Dish effectively reduces his coverage area, which reduces his viewership which means lower ratings and in turn lower local advertising revenue. Guess what, he loses more in local advertising revenue than he gains in his retransmission fee extortion. Bottom line he realizes he needs Dish more than Dish needs him. The broadcaster is who ends up crawling back with a reasonable fee to get his viewers back and restore his ad money. This broadcaster hasn't learned that lesson yet.
Ohh Dish is losing subscribers - I've talked so so many people that have or are going to switch to DirecTV alone that it isn't even funny. If they don't settle it by Sunday - expect to see a flood of people jumping ship just because it will piss off every NASCAR fan and even those that are not but have family that is. Dish needs to settle this and by tomorrow before its too late.
Can we stop acting like broadcasters would have no viewers if it wasn't for sat co's? Do sat co's provide a local signal to viewers who otherwise wouldn't be able to get the signal? Absolutely! Is that really a huge percentage of the viewers? I don't think so. The majority of a stations audience is going to be around the city of license... well within OTA range.
The relationship between sat co's (& cable co's) and broadcasters is symbiotic. Broadcasters benefit by accessing some places they wouldn't be able to. Sat Co's (& cable co's) benefit because they would lose subscribers if they didn't offer LiL. Granted, they wouldn't lose all of them. But does anyone deny having LiL helped E* & D*?
videonex, you may be correct on who "crawls back" to who(m?). You could be wrong also. It might depend on the market and the broadcaster. Broadcasters & Dish both are going to spin the facts to make themselves look better.
The relationship between sat co's (& cable co's) and broadcasters is symbiotic. Broadcasters benefit by accessing some places they wouldn't be able to. Sat Co's (& cable co's) benefit because they would lose subscribers if they didn't offer LiL. Granted, they wouldn't lose all of them. But does anyone deny having LiL helped E* & D*?
videonex, you may be correct on who "crawls back" to who(m?). You could be wrong also. It might depend on the market and the broadcaster. Broadcasters & Dish both are going to spin the facts to make themselves look better.
They may be well within OTA range, but the percentage of them actually set up for OTA or even know that they can still use OTA after the digital transition, is relatively low. You are using numbers and arguments that were pertinent 10 years ago, not so much today.
That's why the broadcasters are so bent on raising retransmission fees...they know that's where most of their viewers get their signal from (cable/satellite), and it's a cash cow revenue stream that they didn't have as much before the digital transition.
Last edited:
True or false... if a sat co/cable co did not offer LiL, would they have as many subscribers? Pick any market you'd like. Sat & Cable Co's need the broadcasters as much as the broadcasters need the sat companies. I feel pretty confident that if either one didn't need the other, there'd be no agreement. No one here knows how much any agreement is for. I do feel pretty safe saying it's less than many popular "cable channels", who MUST rely on satellite/cable for 99.99% of their viewers.
Rollback Walmart pricing is meant to get u in the door. For every rollback there is probably a dozen markups.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using SatelliteGuys
Sent from my Nexus 7 using SatelliteGuys
I can't point to any cold hard facts, but I think it is very dependent on where you are talking about. And I might have tended to agree more until the switch to digital. There are huge chunks of Ct. that can not get all the networks anymore that could before. I had to go to extraordinary lengths to get them, and use my knowledge of antennas to do it. Even in the Tampa area, they moved the tower for the CBS station (WTSP) I again had to buy a better antenna to get it. It still can lose the signal when a plane flies by.
In addition, look at how many live in a condo or apartment as opposed to many years ago where there were more living in single family homes. It's not easy putting up an antenna as it used to be. So I think the networks are more dependent on Sat/Cable than ever.
Oh nice. I just found out I'm in on this too. Thanks Grant Group. My OTA guide data is screwed up too because of this so I can't record using my antenna.
No, it's there. Feel sorry for people who have a bunch of timers on there. I just have one show... whatever. I'll just watch that on Hulu. Still annoys me though. They are probably demanding that AutoHop goes away too.
No I don't.The way I read dustoman's post,made it seem like there was no way to record his ota locals,minus the guide data.Sure,it would be a pain but,you could still record your favorite show/shows.
At one point that was the case during the initial OTA software.
Sent from my iPad 2 using Forum Runner
